| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Completed Research
Forum: Computing for Sustainable Water Forum
Thread: Computing for Sustainable Water project nearing completion |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 566
|
|
| Author |
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Nobody ever replied to my question about the discrepancy, in a thread specifically for problems with this task, so why would I try it again? :-)
I can put 8 cores on it to (hopefully) get to sapphire by the end of the task without using 64-bit windows or linux machines. Still, there is a similar discrepancy in 'credits' (according to BOINCstats) between this project and Einstein... I've got 28+ years of CPU time here, and a little over 2 years of CPU time on Einstein, but the credits given differ by only about 17%. Thanks. |
||
|
|
kateiacy
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Jan 23, 2010 Post Count: 1027 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
Hi Zoso,
----------------------------------------I am not seeing a discrepancy between points for 64-bit vs 32-bit CFSW on Linux. Below are results on 3 different 64-bit machines: cfsw_ 11740_ 11740728_ 0-- kate-jetway1110 Valid 8/10/12 20:08:13 8/11/12 14:12:55 3.45 17.3 / 17.3 cfsw_ 11740_ 11740945_ 0-- kate-jetway1110 Valid 8/10/12 20:08:13 8/11/12 14:12:55 3.43 17.2 / 17.2 cfsw_ 11740_ 11740398_ 0-- kate-jetway1110 Valid 8/10/12 20:08:13 8/11/12 14:12:55 3.44 17.2 / 17.2 cfsw_ 11763_ 11763651_ 0-- system76-pc Valid 8/10/12 22:27:42 8/11/12 14:08:01 0.69 16.9 / 16.9 cfsw_ 11763_ 11763695_ 0-- system76-pc Valid 8/10/12 22:27:42 8/11/12 14:08:01 0.74 18.2 / 18.2 cfsw_ 11752_ 11752218_ 0-- system76-pc Valid 8/10/12 21:10:26 8/11/12 13:07:26 0.73 19.2 / 19.2 cfsw_ 11791_ 11791139_ 0-- kate-amd64 Valid 8/11/12 01:18:19 8/11/12 12:37:04 0.62 17.5 / 17.5 I only have one result from my 32-bit machine in Results Status right now, and it's right in the same points range: cfsw_ 10945_ 10945357_ 0-- lubuntu Pending Validation 8/6/12 13:08:55 8/8/12 14:16:11 2.68 18.3 / 0.0 I think your Superchick machine may have been underclaiming for some reason.  [Edit 1 times, last edit by kateiacy at Aug 11, 2012 3:08:56 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Does the work unit name correspond to the batch? As in: does cfsw_11951 mean it's from batch 11951 of 17000 (going from the CFSW website's statement of 17000 batches http://www.faculty.virginia.edu/CFSW/status.html ) , and we seem to be progressing at 150-160 batches per day.
The WUs being fetched this afternoon are 119XX, so if my assumption is right that's ~ 5000 / 150 = 33 days of full WU supply left. Then a few more days of mop-up for dropped/aborted units. Am I reading this correctly? If so, those of that are just barely reaching the next badge in time might not get it. - Jack |
||
|
|
gb009761
Master Cruncher Scotland Joined: Apr 6, 2005 Post Count: 2977 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Jack, you could be right - although the thing that I don't think which has been explained fully by the project scientists/WCG techs, is the batch numbering system (even though I'm sure it'll have been asked just shortly after the project was launched). Thus, the surprise/shock when it was announced that there was only literally a few weeks left...
----------------------------------------Indeed, the project scientists have been extremely quiet when conversing with us 'crunchers' (perhaps they don't realise that we do like interacting with them, after all, it's only through the power of our spare processors, that they're able to get all this free information). Oh, if only certain project scientists would learn from the examples people such as 'cleanenergy' are setting...  |
||
|
|
Coleslaw
Veteran Cruncher USA Joined: Mar 29, 2007 Post Count: 1343 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
With all of my home systems, I might just hit my 5 year goal under prime conditions. With borged systems included I could easily hit it under prime conditions, so I will have to eyeball things very closely.
----------------------------------------    |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Jack,
I believe that statement about 5-6 weeks for completion could include 10 day period for validation. 5,000/160 = 31 + 10 validation days. Therefore, we have only month to get our badges. |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
...the thing that I don't think which has been explained fully by the project scientists/WCG techs, is the batch numbering system (even though I'm sure it'll have been asked just shortly after the project was launched). Thus, the surprise/shock when it was announced that there was only literally a few weeks left... The concern, the need for guidance/info , has always been there and that need is no different for any project for that matter. Why this need continues to be not fully met is another matter. I'll hazard a guess that there may be 'political' factors involved in the mix, including the idea of an 'informed' crunchers, those crunchers who do not crunch blindly -- which may be something that strikes fear among some people.; |
||
|
|
rembertw
Senior Cruncher Belgium Joined: Nov 21, 2005 Post Count: 275 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
Ahhh, almost finished.
This is why I always crunch up to the Sapphire target with priority with new projects. This way similar surprises can be shrugged off.  With only the intermittent projects selected, and "please send me work...", I should not be competing with others who still want to reach some goal here. Have fun, all! |
||
|
|
Bugg
Senior Cruncher USA Joined: Nov 19, 2006 Post Count: 271 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
With all of my home systems, I might just hit my 5 year goal under prime conditions. With borged systems included I could easily hit it under prime conditions, so I will have to eyeball things very closely. Wow Coleslaw. Your sig took up 25x more space than your actual post did. Isn't that a bit beyond the "allowed" sig size? To those that make the decision, if it's not, can we ALL have sigs that large?  i5-12600K (3.7GHz), 32GB DDR5, Win11 64bit Home |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Wanna save bandwidth and browsing space: Firefox, right click, view image info. Tells you where it came from. Then click the box to suppress, the specific image or the path... voila, no more allprojectsstats. Works as good as or better than RIP (Remove it permanently]
In sig or in post, 600 pixels by 600 pixels is the *official* limit of a forum image![/ot] This morning received 12198 of 17000 makes it 71.75% out the hopper. |
||
|
|
|